Drug experimentation and dependence

[2020hindsight]

recipe for kava
one virgin , one large salad bowl
a handfull of kava root
virgin chews kava, "places" the root remains and "liquid dust" in a bowl
adds water to taste
one handfull of root and large bowl serves about eight (times three coconut shellfuls each).

after that you can use a bucket - and two virgins.
meanwhile virgin(s) sleeps off the effects of the cooking ceremony (sweating over a hot stove etc) while the party goes on.

one shell = your tongue goes a bit numb
two shells = your throat goes a bit numb
three shells = your brain goes a bit numb

Here's a NT gov website .....

http://www.nt.gov.au/health/healthdev/health_promotion/bushbook/volume2/chap1/kava.htm Kava comes from the root of the pepper plant Piper methysticum. It is used in traditional ceremonies and for social occasions in many of the Pacific Islands. Kava is valued for its medicinal properties and is sold as a herbal preparation or medicine in many countries.

In the NT, Aboriginal people make a kava drink by mixing the dry, powdered root with water. Kava resin, suspended in water, contains active chemicals known as kava lactones. The strength of kava varies greatly and depends on the plant from which it is prepared and how it is prepared.

When kava is drunk, the active chemicals are absorbed through the stomach into the bloodstream and pass quickly to the brain. Kava acts as sedative and soporific (sleep inducing). It also induces generalised muscle relaxation (Alexander et al 1987:6). Depending on the strength of the kava mixture, it can have a psychoactive effect. While kava does not contain alcohol, people talk about getting 'drunk' on kava. A person is thought to be drunk on kava if he or she cannot walk or talk properly, is very friendly, dizzy, sleepy or is acting 'funny' (Watson et al 1988:66).

There is more to learn about the short and long-term health effects of drinking kava and more research is being done.

Short-term effects of drinking kava
In small to moderate amounts, kava causes:

mild sleepiness
relaxation of muscles
feelings of happiness
numbness of the mouth and throat
possible loss of appetite
In larger amounts, kava causes:

loss of muscle control
sleepiness/stupor
pupil dilation and redness of the eyes
a sick feeling
Kava drinkers are thus sometimes recognisable by their bloodshot eyes and ulcerous skin lesions called Kani Kani (Lebot et al 1992:60). A second side effect of heavy kava consumption is an occasional state of apathy that reportedly affects some drinkers preventing them from eating adequately (Lebot et al 1992:60). Half a coconut shell (approximately 100-150ml) of certain varieties of kava is strong enough to put a drinker into a deep, dreamless sleep within 30 minutes. The next day the drinker awakens having fully recovered normal physical and mental capabilities (Lebot et al 1992:59).

oops looks like there are some after effects after all
still I'd like to see the origin of that website - and a true and fair comparison with the alternatives of - alcohol (and petrol sniffing etc)

http://www.nt.gov.au/health/healthdev/health_promotion/bushbook/volume2/chap1/kava.htm

Kava and sudden death
There have been a number of sudden deaths of young, adult men during heavy exercise after they had drunk large amounts of kava. These young men had diseased hearts. We know that smoking, alcohol, high blood pressure, diabetes, lack of exercise, excessive weight and poor nutrition all contribute to cardiovascular disease. It is also known that unaccustomed exercise puts a strain on a diseased heart, increasing the risk of sudden death. Dehydration from heavy sweating and not drinking water can also be dangerous.

Some young Aboriginal people have cardiovascular disease without knowing it. Some of these young people drink alcohol heavily and smoke and so are already at risk of further damaging their hearts. Drinking kava may add to this risk.

As above - I find that last sentence a case for banning alcohol and smoking , as much as it is for banning kava !! ??

 

[2020hindsight]

PS

Withdrawal
There have not been any documented reports of withdrawal symptoms when heavy kava drinkers stop drinking kava. However, people who stop using should be monitored initially to see if any health problems emerge and need attention

wow - brilliant Mr Brough !!!
gotta be a good reason to ban it
and encourage alcoholism instead
sheesh!!

 

[2020hindsight]

yep - good one mister Brough
PS hope you enjoy your time in opposition

..unlike alcohol, kava was said to be good for 'keeping relationships strong'. .. it was known as a 'family drink'. ......... helped people talk about issues. .......could drink kava socially without the disruptive effects associated with alcohol misuse. etc

History of use
Kava was first introduced into Eastern Arnhem Land in 1981 after some community members visited Fiji. They thought it might be beneficial for Aboriginal people and stop them from drinking alcohol. It did not take long before kava use spread. By 1986, people in eight Top End communities were drinking kava when it was available. Most communities in the NT have chosen not to allow kava drinking and therefore its use is confined to Arnhem Land.

How many people drink kava?
From the late 1980s there was an increase in the number of people drinking kava:

in 1986, about 42 per cent of men and 12 per cent of women in kava using communities said they drank kava (Watson et al 1988:18)
in 1992, about 70 per cent of men and 30 per cent of women reported drinking kava (d'Abbs 1993:22)

Patterns of drinking
Research conducted in 1986 found that unlike alcohol, kava was said to be good for 'keeping relationships strong'. In some communities, it was known as a 'family drink'. Some people have said that kava helped people talk about issues. People could drink kava socially without the disruptive effects associated with alcohol misuse. Some communities have supported kava use because people felt that if kava was not available, there would be more trouble with alcohol (see Alexander et al 1987 and Watson et al 1988:66-68).

People tend to drink kava in groups. Powdered kava is mixed with water in a large bowl. Both men and women sit around the bowl in a kava drinking circle. The 'captain' passes a cup of kava to each person in turn. Kava drinking can take place any time day or night and some people moved from one kava circle to another.

Kava and the Law in the NT
In March 1994, the Commonwealth Government introduced a law prohibiting the importation of kava into Australia for the purpose of selling it. This law changed in October 1997 so that people who wanted to bring kava into Australia were required to apply for an import permit from the Commonwealth Government. They also had to sign the National Code of Kava Management and abide by any laws in the Northern Territory.

 

[2020hindsight]

while I think of it, this website is canadian - about alcohol - (alchohol whatever - they spell it either way in the first two sentences) and teenagers

http://www.news-medical.net/?id=731
Teenagers being bombarded by alchohol advertising
Published: Wednesday, 21-Apr-2004

Alcohol advertising on television, and youth exposure to it, grew substantially in 2002 from 2001, and although new industry marketing codes were announced in 2003, they will still allow for substantial youth overexposure to alcohol ads, according to a study released today by the Center on Alcohol Marketing and Youth at Georgetown University.

The Center found that the total number of alcohol ads on network, local and cable television increased to 289,381 in 2002, a 39% hike from 2001. Spending grew by 22%, to more than $990 million in 2002. Youth 12-20 were more likely on a per capita basis than adults to have seen 66,218 ads, a 30% increase over 2001.

"This dramatic increase in alcohol ads seen by our children in 2002 suggests the problem got worse," said Jim O'Hara, executive director of the Center. "While a step in the right direction, the industry's new marketing codes lag far behind its aggressive marketing practices."

Key findings from the study include:

Alcohol advertising increased substantially. Driving the 39% increase in ads and the 22% increase in spending overall were significant increases in distilled spirits and low-alcohol refresher television advertising-418% and 147% increases in spending respectively.

More ads are overexposing youth. Youth 12-20 were more likely on a per capita basis than adults to have seen 66,218 ads, a 30% increase over 2001. These ads were purchased at a cost to the industry of more than $118 million. In 2002, youth ages 12-20 saw two beer and distilled spirits ads on television for every three seen by adults, and nearly three advertisements for low-alcohol refreshers for every four seen by adults.

Teen programming is filled with alcohol advertising. All 15 of the television shows most popular with teens ages 12-17 had alcohol ads. Throughout 2002, alcohol companies placed 5,085 ads on programs such as Survivor, Fear Factor and That '70s Show, at a total cost of nearly $53 million. Spending on this group of shows increased by 60% compared with 2001. Six of the shows-five on WB, one on Fox-had disproportionately youthful audiences.

Industry guidelines inadequate. Alcohol industry self-regulation is the primary means of regulating alcohol advertising's exposure to youth. The current industry standard, announced in September 2003, sets the maximum permissible youth audience composition for alcohol advertising at 30%. Because youth ages 12-20 are only 13.3% of the national TV viewing audience, a threshold of 30% allows alcohol ads to be placed on programs where there are twice as many youth as in the viewing population.

 

[Julia]

Hi Julia,

It is actually not controversial, you just don't see many direct references to it in mainstream media, given its iconic status as the pinnacle of evil drugs.

However, even this basic medical fact is largely unknown by many people who nonetheless hold very strong views about it.

All of the available research agrees that, so far as harm is concerned, heroin is likely to cause some nausea and possibly severe constipation and that is all again leaving aside the no doubt unpleasant and lengthy withdrawal phase.

In the words of a 1965 New York study by Dr Richard Brotman: "Medical knowledge has long since laid to rest the myth that opiates observably harm the body." "

It is certainly highly addictive and that is probably its main notoriety. The nexus between addiction and high illicit cost naturally generates a lot of crime, which adds to its sensational reputation.

Mentioning this incontrovertible fact can easily be misconstrued as meaning you must therefore support its non-medical use - which I do not.

It is mainly the adulterants and viruses and bacteria on the skin or injected through unhygenic practices and needle sharing that cause related health problems and the debasement and life of crime many are drawn into to fund their habit.

The overdoses are primarily through un-controlled strength variations in the product because of the path to market. Aside from that, even glucose powder, a common cutting agent, introduced intravenously, is quite bad for you, not to mention whatever other powdered crud that gets mixed with it because of a similar appearance.

It isn't entirely at the heart of the issue, just wanted to introduce an unpopular fact that isn't often mentioned. For obvious reasons, misapprehensions about its basic pharmacutical properties are not corrected when heard by people who know this fact, but who are violently opposed to it, and so it tends not to get repeated much.

Hi Mister S

Thank you. It might surprise some people reading this thread to know that I agree about pure opiates not in themselves being a cause of physiological or psychological dysfunction.

In my original post on this thread, I referred to the addicted doctor. Whilst he was just taking an opiate, carefully titrated to simply avoid going into withdrawal, there was no problem. But mixed with other drugs, particularly stimulants (Brampton Cocktail, anyone?) and alcohol, the descent into drug induced psychosis was rapid.

The point I've been trying to make is that it's almost impossible for a drug user to know when that recreational use is going to turn into an addiction.
And I can simply never describe the ugliness of addiction.

Lucky, no I don't see most things as black and white at all. I have readily admitted that my views about drugs are undoubtedly coloured by my personal experience of losing someone I loved to drugs. That doesn't make that experience any less relevant to this discussion. All of you who are so absolutely sure you can use drugs without risk could do worse than consider an alternative point of view. That's all I'm offering.

And "what business is it of mine what people do in the privacy of their own home". None. As long as the effects of that behaviour do not subsequently affect me or any other innocent person on the road or anywhere else.
Nioka has already made this point.

Whiskers and Mister S - you've both made a lot of sense. Thanks.

 

[JeSSica WaBBit]

Whiskers - i did lose interest just because its one of those arguments that everyone has their own opinion and we could argue back and forth but i dont see any changes being made.
Guess i have become apathetic, but i'm like that, i don't even bother voting anymore much for the same reason, just dont feel it matters either way who gets in, not much will change.

But, to your question...............what objective tests do i do to monitor the effects of my dose rates?

Hmmmmm, good question Whiskers.

This is how i see it - drug use carries with it risk and with that risk comes damage to the body. This damage will be to different parts of the body and will depend on the dose. However, everything in life damages the body to a degree so my view is that this is all part of living life.

Like i have said, i am not out to smash myself senseless, this is not what most recreational drug users do, i am just out to enjoy myself. Just like having a beer at the pub.

I think it is worth pointing out that drug addicts and recreational drug users are two different groups of people as far as i am concerned. In my opinion i feel that a recreational drug user is no more likely to become a drug addict than say people who drink alcohol and become alcoholics. Of course with abuse it can happen but in my experience most recreational drug users are not abusing substances.
I say all this because i think this is the biggest problem, many people can not seperate the issue of drug addict and rec. user. Further to this, it depends on what drugs the rec. user is using, this is also important to clarify as far as i am concerned.

I do not ever get check ups at the Doctors or ever have any tests so scientifically i can not be sure how i am travellling. It is possible that i am slowly declining and dont even know it but i am pretty certain i am in good health. Well reasonable anyway.

How do i know i am in reasonable health. Well, i have not had a sick day off work for over two years, i feel great and my appearance seems to be good.

As for my insides, well, who knows but i would think i would be no better or worse than the average guy on the street. I could be wrong?

The noggin seems to be functioning okley didily doodily because i have a very good job and have it together in that department. I could lose more than half my brain and still whip **** on some of the drips we have in our society.

I am a non smoker which helps, unless the occasional spliff is considered smoking. I'd say someone who drives to work in the city each day would suck in way more nasties into their lungs than me.

Whiskers, thats very thorough of you to have yourself checked. I am actually impressed.

I am unfortunately not as thorough as you about those sorts of things, must come back to my apathy. Maybe when they tell me someday that i have 7 days to live i will wish i had those regular check ups. But, thats just me, i cruise through life and its not in my personality to change.

I accept that some day i will die, hey, its going to get us all some day. Whether i die at 40 or 90 that remains to be seen but i'd say i've got a few more years in me yet. Lets just say, i look a damn sight better than every smoker i work with.

I'll go out on a limb and say 10,000 more people will die in Australia in the coming year from obesity related illness than than do from, E, Cocaine and Weed.
Have you seen the size of people when you go to shopping centres, absolutely massive. They aint going to make 90 thats for sure.

So in summary - i accept some damage from recreational drugs on my body, however i dont beleive this damage is very significant. I can not prove this to you other to tell you i feel great!
To me, its a risk assessment and the risk is very very low as far as i am concerned.
Not sure what else to say except your are correct to say i dont know exactly what these substances are doing to my body. This also forms part of my arguement for the government issuing the drugs so i know what i am buying is exactly what it is supposed to be.

This being the case, the problems is - Myself and others will keep using regardless of whether it is pure, legal or otherwise. This is proven historically, so why would you persist with the same laws?
Especially while usage grows................i'll never understand.

Lets face it, if you accept that 50% of Aussies have used recreational drugs then we are fooling ourselves with the system we currently have. I can only see usage increasing so why not at least provide clean MDMA (E), Coke and Weed so that young kids dont go taking something that is not what it is supposed to be.

I could bang on but i'm sure you see what i am trying to say, its a tricky one and i dont see an easy solution but at least we should try some other things.

JW

 

[Sean K]

LOL

Cousins charged with possessing prohibited drug
October 16, 2007 - 8:01PM

AFL star Ben Cousins has been charged with possessing a prohibited drug, WA police said tonight.

..........

The 29-year-old West Coast Eagles midfielder and his former teammate Daniel Chick were arrested separately and were tonight being interviewed by detectives.

 

[Whiskers]

Whiskers - i did lose interest just because its one of those arguments that everyone has their own opinion and we could argue back and forth but i dont see any changes being made.
Guess i have become apathetic, but i'm like that...

It's good to see you're back, Jessica.

I'm a realist. I accept that people have always used drugs and potions and chemicals of all sorts. That is not going to stop just because someone makes some laws. I know people who smoked all their life and lived to a ripe old age and similarly with some people who like a little grog every day.

On the other hand I have seen severe reactions in my extended family from the most innocuous substances like preservatives in food and dyes in imported clothes that cause allergic reactions.

I can tell you are not out to smash myself senseless. You come across as a bright well balanced person with a healthy bit of a sense of humour.

The noggin seems to be functioning okley didily doodily because i have a very good job and have it together in that department. I could lose more than half my brain and still whip **** on some of the drips we have in our society.

This is what I am a bit concerned about, because it comes as you say with the personality.

I do not ever get check ups at the Doctors or ever have any tests so scientifically i can not be sure how i am travellling. It is possible that i am slowly declining and dont even know it but i am pretty certain i am in good health. Well reasonable anyway.

It's good that you like company and seem to associate well, but sometimes your best friends can't or won't tell you what you really need to know. I know my mates didn't for me.

I could bang on but i'm sure you see what i am trying to say, its a tricky one and i dont see an easy solution but at least we should try some other things.

JW

That's the attitude, Jessica. As I said above some people get severe reactions from the most innocuous substances and others can appear to be doing all the wrong things and thrive. A lot gets down to your own individual genes and physiology, to see what you can and can't tolerate.

You sound a bit like my late father (and me when I was younger too). He was complacent about his health and getting check-ups until he started to get noticeably ill from a stomach cancer. Conversely a brothers partner just felt a bit off, and she got a check-up and looks she will survive a similar type of cancer, just because she got regular check-ups.

Can I ask you as a friend, would you organise to get a full medical check up sometime soon? I promise you it will pay enormous dividends later in life to find a good GP now that you can get along with.

You don't have to tell him/her about drugs if you don't want to, but in your case if you found the right GP you would be able to discuss the issues in full confidence.

It may well be that your doseage is not doing much harm. But in the event that you inadvertantly had a problem one day, wouldn't it be better if you saw your own GP that you trusted, than land in a casualty department and get put through the ringer.

Keep in touch won't you, cos we like your wit and knowledge and humour around here.

P.s. So long as you don't find fault with my grammar and spelling.

 

[Wysiwyg]

Guess i have become apathetic, but i'm like that, i don't even bother voting anymore much for the same reason, just dont feel it matters either way who gets in, not much will change.
JW

Yes i feel the same way.Didn`t vote for ten years and now the system has found me i still don`t vote.Empty boxes and i`m sure there are a few thousand others that feel powerless to change anything with their vote.

I think it is worth pointing out that drug addicts and recreational drug users are two different groups of people as far as i am concerned. In my opinion i feel that a recreational drug user is no more likely to become a drug addict than say people who drink alcohol and become alcoholics. Of course with abuse it can happen but in my experience most recreational drug users are not abusing substances.

This is one of the problems.Who are going to be addicts and who are not?Alcohol is `controlled` by the laws so anyone can drink freely until they

.The mind altering effect of alcohol can vent a persons inner happiness, sadness or bitter rage.Apparently thc has a calming/pacifying effect.The problem with that is `afterwards` it can leave you feeling lethargic and craving for another `hit` to `escape` again.The addictive cycle.If one is strong willed then the craving can be overcome.This is the crux of the problem with all mind altering stuff.
Another thing about taking any mind altering stuff is it begins when the individual is young.When young, impressionable and weak-willed to "peer" groups.No life experience or information.Mostly to escape their present difficulties in life.A rebellious thing to do.After years the kids, now adults, make excuses that it`s under control and o.k. avoiding the truth that they are hooked.

So in summary - i accept some damage from recreational drugs on my body, however i dont beleive this damage is very significant. I can not prove this to you other to tell you i feel great!

Finally, it is not only what people do to themselves.It is the effect the drug cycle has on innocent people.The continuous dysfunction of mind altering drugs in society, either peripheral or direct, is the reason why kids should not have access to mind altering substances that WILL fock up their lives.

 

[Wysiwyg]

Peripheral or direct results of mind altering drugs....(in any order)

poor concentration
lethargy
hallucination
induced schizophrenia
killing
theft
accident prone
lying
self conscious
delusions of grandeur
paranoia
unsociable
poor grades/work
poor comprehension
broken families
failed relationships or never getting started in one
introverted
no one knows that i`m on drugs
i feel cool that everyone knows i`m on drugs
i`m cool because i`m not addicted
crying/grieving mothers
angry fathers
innocent pensioners in hospital
money laundered
raped people
failed sports
hyperactive
disrespectful
ignorant
abusive


Oh by the way......i`m sure there are some nice "mind altering drug" users out there.

 

[Whiskers]

whiskers, i like your style..

there is always cause and effect to consider with drugs of any nature..

my story is no different to many others.. drugs and alcohol are killers.. living in a bubble and using with friends is now socially acceptable, and consequences are not noticed on initial use of the drugs used today.. i see it as a major issue, a major cause of social problems, suicide and it nice to see a few here are taking it seriously.

because its deadly and serious!!

Thanks Agentm.

And MisterS, Julia and everyone else of like mind.

To 2020, here's to cutting back a bit on the grog... to JeSSica WaBBit's honesty in discussing her vices and I'm still working on cutting back on my caffine drinks (under doctors orders).

 

[nioka]

I think it is worth pointing out that drug addicts and recreational drug users are two different groups of people as far as i am concerned.

JW

They are 2 different groups of people. The first group has got there and the second probably will get there. That is the difference.

 

[Agentm]

whiskers,

i understand the urge and need to experiment and use drugs, i have many friends in various stages of use and abuse of the different substances..

i dont pass judge,ment, i ask that people see cause and effect..


its not the drugs thats the problem , the cause of the use is the issue..

my sister used dope and alcohol to deal with a mental illness, and nearly died.

we cant help everyone all the time,, just try and understand and be there!! like you are whiskers, i see your way and i admire your style!!

cheers

 

[Happy]

They are 2 different groups of people. The first group has got there and the second probably will get there. That is the difference.

This is probable the best way to put it.

 

[Kremmen]

They are 2 different groups of people. The first group has got there and the second probably will get there. That is the difference.

What an inane suggestion.

According to government statistics, 17% of Australians use illicit drugs each year and "In 1998, approximately 19,000 deaths were attributed to tobacco use, while 2,524 were alcohol-related and 1,023 were associated with illicit drugs."

So, you have smokers making up 23% of the population and yet 19 times as many deaths being caused by smoking as by the 17% using "illicit" drugs. It's extremely obvious that the vast majority of those drug users are not addicts and are not doing themselves much damage. What's more, as most of the deaths due to illegal drugs are caused by other ingredients mixed in or unexpected doses, most of the deaths are caused by the drugs being illegal. If they were legal, deaths would drop dramatically.

Most politicians like demonising drugs just because they know that a "war" on something makes them popular because they are seen to be doing something about an evil, albeit one which they have largely created themselves. Most cops are gullible or gutless enough to follow the party line. It was good to see that finally one of Britain's most senior police officers is calling all drugs to be legalised.

 

[Wysiwyg]

What an inane suggestion.

According to government statistics, 17% of Australians use illicit drugs each year and "In 1998, approximately 19,000 deaths were attributed to tobacco use, while 2,524 were alcohol-related and 1,023 were associated with illicit drugs."

So, you have smokers making up 23% of the population and yet 19 times as many deaths being caused by smoking as by the 17% using "illicit" drugs.

Do you think that making highly addictive mind altering drugs more available is going to get your stats. balanced?This is the sort of narrow minded view that is thankfully rare among the wider community.I am so glad folks like this aren`t in power.Sheesshhh, we all would be affected by the disease.

 

[wayneL]

Of all the drug and alcohol taking hooligans that I hung out with when I was young, only three ever became adversely affected - one by drugs and two by alcohol.

Person 1/ Just a straight out pisstank. Alcoholism was a given.

Person 2/ One guy regularly smoked weed, took a few lines every now and a gain and rarely drank. He was healthy, well balanced, worked well etc. He decided to get off the drugs, but then started to increase his drinking. Very quickly became an alcoholic, and $#@!ed up his life in short order.

Person 3/ This guy started on grog, graduated to dope, then to the harder stuff, eventually heroin. He was the stereotypical media paradigm of a drug addict. (with all the typical dire results)

This is out of dozen and dozens of people.

Even more got into trouble from being pissed. (fights, dumb stuff like that)

I don't personally know anyone who got into trouble because of drugs. (but not suggesting that it doesn't happen, of course it does)

My point is that in my limited experience, the vast majority of recreational drug takers do not become addicts. Just about all of my current friends used when they were younger... some still do into their late 40's, one into her 60's, but are not addicts.

FWIW

 

[Mofra]

My point is that in my limited experience, the vast majority of recreational drug takers do not become addicts. Just about all of my current friends used when they were younger... some still do into their late 40's, one into her 60's, but are not addicts.

Bingo. Somehow enough people have subscribed to the view that all drug users are junkies or on a downward spiral. This is simply not the case.

I know plenty of people who used recreational drugs 4-5 times a year, in moderation. Somehow these people are to be the subject of a zero tolerance policy, when they know the risks & are responsible about their useage?

Given the incidence of heart disease in this country, we'd be doing more good banning obese people from fast food outlets

 

[nioka]

Bingo. Somehow enough people have subscribed to the view that all drug users are junkies or on a downward spiral. This is simply not the case.

I know plenty of people who used recreational drugs 4-5 times a year, in moderation. Somehow these people are to be the subject of a zero tolerance policy, when they know the risks & are responsible about their useage?
:

Yes but ARE THEY SAFE ON THE ROAD. Or just think they are.

 

[Julia]

One thing which needs to be taken into consideration when quoting stats for people dying from smoking or alcohol related diseases as opposed to deaths from illicit drugs is probably the fact that most people who abuse alcohol and tobacco do so for life, whereas it seems people who use drugs (discounting the few who do get to be irretrievably addicted) do so for a limited period.